THE LAST WORD
George F. Will
As the Oceans Rise
Obama's words mesmerize a nation accustomed to leaders who use words with antic indifference to their accuracy.
Journalists consider themselves crusty, unsentimental creatures who, their battered fedoras shoved back on their heads, have slouched out of Ben Hecht's 1928 play "The Front Page," oozing skepticism from every pore. Actually, they are round-heeled romantics, such pushovers for a new swain that they did not laugh until their ribs squeaked when Barack Obama concluded his triumphal St. Paul, Minn., speech by proclaiming: "I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick …"
It is absolutely certain that generations from now someone will remember that even before that night in St. Paul, care was provided to the sick in America. Obama also asserted that future generations would say that "this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal …" The man and the moment have met.
Obama's words mesmerize a nation accustomed to leaders who routinely use words with antic indifference to their accuracy. The No Child Left Behind law promises, indeed requires, that by 2014 all children will be "proficient" in reading and math. That will not happen. Obama vows to reduce carbon emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. John McCain says 60 percent. Whether either goal should be reached, neither will be. Commentators, too, use words in peculiar ways, as when they speak of Obama and Hillary Clinton needing to bring together "the two wings of the party." There is the left wing, and the other left wing. As one precise commentator has said, Clinton and Obama differ about as much as the Everly Brothers.
As the primary season folds seamlessly into the general election campaign, there are few certainties, but this will be the first presidential election contested by two sitting senators, so this will be just the third time the country has elected a sitting senator (Harding in 1920, Kennedy in 1960). And there is an asymmetry between the senators' possible trajectories: McCain, although a very familiar figure, has a downside risk from becoming better-known concerning one issue; Obama has an upside potential from becoming better-known regarding an elemental fact.
McCain is fortunate. The eerie narcissism of Clinton's speech the night that Obama clinched the nomination distracted attention from McCain's badly delivered speech the same night, in New Orleans. If he really opposes torture, he will take pity on the public and master the use of a teleprompter.
He said, "The American people didn't get to know me yesterday, as they are just getting to know Senator Obama." McCain, who has been running for president for 10 years, has never entertained the thought that the country might sometimes have a surfeit of him. Does some statute require that he appear on at least one of the five Sunday morning talk shows every week (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox News)? He has appeared on them 67 times since 2004. He has been such a ubiquitous figure, it will be difficult for him to seize the attention of a public that thinks it knows everything about him.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: TheCandyPoem @ 09/13/2008 2:35:13 PM
Comment: The Quran on the oceans:
http://www.thekeytoislam.com/en/scientific-explanations/oceans.shtml
Posted By: ginamlaster @ 06/13/2008 4:17:55 AM
Comment: Honestly, I'm at a loss as to why they can't cut our taxes to put money back into our wallets and thereby back into our economy. First of all, if you sat down and added up the money that's wasted on pork barrel spending (like the $85M wasted on supplies for Katrina victims that none of the victims ever got), there's billions of dollars floating around in the economy that are just being misspent.
Secondly, institute a flat federal tax of 10% for everyone, regardless of income bracket or corporate status so everyone pays their fair share. No H&R Block, write offs, refunds, and no need for a bloated and outdated IRS. Get rid of state income taxes (some states already have) and that puts even more money back into our paychecks. And get rid of property taxes so more people don't lose their homes and people get to keep even more of their money. That'll also make it possible for more people to get into a house. Instead hike the sales tax on everything but food, fuel and medicine, and create more toll roads to pay for roads and infrastructure.
Instead of these bogus one-time stimulus packages, this would allow the government to collect taxes while at the same time putting REAL money back into the economy in the form of a substantially larger paycheck; money you earned, but which they are no longer subtracting from your check. You can't cheat on your taxes because if you buy any goods and services, you pay tax at the cash register.
A flat 10% tax means that CEO's that pulled in $40M in salary have to put 10% of it back into Uncle Sam's pocket, and that corporations that made billions have to pay their fair share. But eliminating state taxes makes it much easier for them to bring much-needed jobs and money into the state without having to grease the palms of state and local officials, and that will make it cheaper to manufacture here and hopefully bring jobs back to the U.S.
I'm sure congress will never go for something like this because those earmarks and the taxes are how they hold on to power. But I say we put the screws to them. Anyone who votes against at least a 3-year moratorium on the earmarks and flat tax will get his a$$ voted out of office and replaced by someone who'll vote our way. The people currently in office have been deadlocked and getting nothing done for years now, and most of them need to go anyway. But no one, not Obama or McCain, is going to get this economy back on its feet unless they first address the problem of bringing a steady stream of cash back into everyone's homes so we can start shopping and buying big-ticket items again. Best way to do that: Tax so that everyone has to pay their fair share, no one can cheat, and our wallets are full again.
Posted By: ginamlaster @ 06/13/2008 3:26:58 AM
Comment: HE'S THE LIAR?!!! Here are some classic Clinton lies:
1. Bosnian sniper fire...not just inaccurate or misspoken. A bald face lie caught on tape.
2. Foreign policy in Ireland that the Irish officials present say never happened. Funny they don't remember her taking part in negotiations.
3. 35 years of experience...as what? Because it certainly wasn't as president. Her White House experience was the same as Laura Bush, Nancy Reagan, Betty Ford, etc. Unless you've already been a sitting president, NO ONE HAS EXPERIENCE BEING PRESIDENT. None of the candidates have that experience. Being married to a president doesn't make you qualified to do the job, any more than being married to an electrician makes you qualified to wire a building.Spending 35 years around experienced politicians doesn't make you a politician with 35 years of experience.
4. The press mistreated her...except when they were calling her "inevitable".
You don't seem to mind being lied to when Hillary's the one doing the lying. But it no longer matters. She can lie as much as she likes now because we no longer have to pay her any attention.